Why is the Energy Momentum Tensor of a Perfect Fluid a Tenso

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the nature of the energy momentum tensor of a perfect fluid in the context of relativity, specifically addressing why it is considered a tensor despite the transformation properties of its components, particularly the density. Participants explore the definitions of physical density, coordinate transformations, and the implications for different observers measuring the same physical quantity.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the energy momentum tensor formula and questions why it is a tensor, noting that the density ##\rho## does not transform as a scalar under certain coordinate transformations.
  • Another participant asserts that ##\rho## is a scalar, defined as the physical density in the rest frame of the fluid.
  • Some participants discuss the concept of physical density and its measurement, emphasizing that it is the density measured by an observer at rest relative to the fluid.
  • Concerns are raised about the uniqueness of rest frames and how coordinate transformations affect density measurements, leading to confusion about which density should be considered by observers in different frames.
  • One participant clarifies that observers at rest relative to each other will agree on the volume of an object, while others note that observers in relative motion will define different spacetime intervals for volume measurements.
  • A later reply highlights that the scalar ##\rho## is defined in terms of a specific set of spacetime intervals that describe the volume of a fluid element for an observer at rest relative to the fluid.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the nature of density and its transformation properties, leading to an unresolved debate about the implications of coordinate changes on the definition of physical quantities in relativity.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the discussion involves assumptions about the definitions of physical density and the effects of coordinate transformations, which may not be universally agreed upon.

klpskp
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
The energy momentum tensor of a perfect relativistic fluid is given by

$$T^{\mu\nu} = (\rho + p)u^\mu u^\nu + p g^{\mu\nu}$$

I don't understand why this is a tensor, i.e. why it transforms properly under coordinate changes.

##u^\mu u^\nu## and ##g^{\mu\nu}## are tensors, so for ##T^{\mu\nu}## to be a tensor, ##\rho## and ##p## must be scalar functions. However, ##\rho## is not a scalar function, because under the coordinate transform
$$t'=t $$ $$ x'=2x $$ $$ y'=2y $$ $$ z'=2z$$

we get ##\rho' = \frac{\rho}{8}##

so ##\rho## does not transform like a scalar function.

So why is the energy momentum tensor of a perfect fluid a tensor anyway?
Thank you for your help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
##\rho## is a scalar. It is the physical density in the rest frame of the fluid, not the coordinate density.
 
Dear Ordruin,

what do you mean by physical density?

I understand that we mean the density in some frame in which the fluid is at rest, i.e ##u^0=1## and ##u^i=0##. However, such a frame is not unique, the coordinate transformation from my original post takes one rest frame to another rest frame. But this transformation changes the density.
 
klpskp said:
what do you mean by physical density?

He means the actual physical observable "density in the frame in which the fluid is at rest". That's a measurable number at every event in spacetime: ##\rho## is simply the scalar function on spacetime that outputs that measurable number at every event. (Similar remarks apply to ##p##, by the way.)
 
klpskp said:
such a frame is not unique, the coordinate transformation from my original post takes one rest frame to another rest frame. But this transformation changes the density

It "changes the density" in the sense that an observer at rest in the new frame will measure a different density. But the density the observer at rest in the new frame measures is not ##\rho##; ##\rho## is defined as the measurable number "density measured by an observer at rest relative to the fluid". Changing frames does not change measurable numbers; an observer at rest in the new frame will still agree that the observer at rest relative to the fluid measures the density ##\rho##.
 
Unfortunately I still don't understand the answer, maybe I clarify my problem:

Suppose we have observer 1, who is at rest relative to the fluid. Now suppose we have observer 2, whose worldline is the same as that of observer 1. In particular, observer 2 is also at rest relative to the fluid. However, observer 2 decides to measure all his length in in different unit than observer 1, say he uses a meter stick half as long as that of observe 1. This corresponds to the coordinate change of my original post. Observer 1 and observer 2 will measure different densities of the fluid.

Now look at some observer 3, who is not at rest relative to the fluid. He tries to measure the physical density of the fluid. Does he choose the density which observer 1 measures, or the density which observer 2 measures?
 
It is the same density. 1000 kg/m^3 is the same density as 1 kg/L.
 
klpskp said:
Suppose we have observer 1, who is at rest relative to the fluid. Now suppose we have observer 2, whose worldline is the same as that of observer 1. In particular, observer 2 is also at rest relative to the fluid. However, observer 2 decides to measure all his length in in different unit than observer 1, say he uses a meter stick half as long as that of observe 1. This corresponds to the coordinate change of my original post.

No, it doesn't. See below.

klpskp said:
Observer 1 and observer 2 will measure different densities of the fluid.

No, they won't. Observer 2's unit of volume will be smaller, but the amount of mass he measures to be in that volume will also be smaller by the same amount.
 
klpskp said:
Now look at some observer 3, who is not at rest relative to the fluid. He tries to measure the physical density of the fluid. Does he choose the density which observer 1 measures, or the density which observer 2 measures?

Neither. He picks his own units of mass and volume and measures the mass of the fluid per unit volume.
 
  • #10
I found the source of my confusion: Of course all observers who are at rest with respect to each other can agree on the volume of a given object, because the metric allows them to agree on the length of spacetime intervals. Then the density is the mass of the object, divided by this common volume, not divided by the product of the three coordinates that describe that object.

Thanks to everyone to help clarifying :)
 
  • #11
klpskp said:
all observers who are at rest with respect to each other can agree on the volume of a given object, because the metric allows them to agree on the length of spacetime intervals.

You don't need the part in bold. All observers, whether they are at rest with respect to each other or not, will agree on the lengths of all spacetime intervals.

What they won't agree on are which spacetime intervals describe the "volume" of the object in their rest frame, if they are in relative motion. See further comments below.

klpskp said:
Then the density is the mass of the object, divided by this common volume, not divided by the product of the three coordinates that describe that object.

"The product of three coordinates" is just another way of saying "the product of three particular spacetime intervals". The key is which three spacetime intervals describe the appropriate "volume", since, as noted above, different observers that are moving relative to each other will define different spacetime intervals as describing the sides of a cube at rest relative to them. The correct answer is the three spacetime intervals that describe the sides of a cube at rest relative to the fluid at some instant of time according to clocks at rest relative to the fluid. The scalar ##\rho## is just the rest mass of fluid inside that cube divided by its volume. All observers, whatever their state of motion, will agree on these numbers, because they are defined in terms of spacetime intervals, which are invariant for all observers.

So what makes ##\rho## a scalar is not that all observers will agree on the volume of a given fluid element--they won't, because observers in relative motion will use different spacetime intervals to describe the volume. What makes ##\rho## a scalar is that all observers will agree on the lengths of a particular set of three spacetime intervals, the ones that describe the volume of a fluid element for an observer at rest relative to the fluid. "At rest relative to the fluid" is the physical criterion that picks out that particular set of spacetime intervals.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
976
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 50 ·
2
Replies
50
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K